Skip to content
Detroit Hispanic Development Corporation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Detroit Hispanic Development Corporation

The DETROIT HISPANIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION's mission is to make a difference by creating life changing opportunities for youth and their families.

$536k
Granted FY2024still arriving
9
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$98k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Human Services$494kCommunity Improvement$393kCivil Rights$255kReligion$216kPublic Benefit$189kHealth$187kInternational$144kEnvironment$105kOther$0
02FY2024 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $416,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $536,200 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $120,200 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k7 grants · $240k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $176k
$36,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD INITIATIVES$98,000
SOUTHWEST COMMUNITY JUSTICE COURT$78,000
CENTRO MULTICULTURAL LA FAMILIA INC$36,000
VOCES$36,000
HISPANIC CENTER OF WESTERN MICHIGAN INC$36,000
LATIN AMERICANS UNITED FOR PROGRESS$36,000
HISPANIC AMERICAN COUNCIL INC$36,000
HISPANIC TECHNOLOGY & COMMUNITY CENTER$36,000
SOUTHWEST DETROIT COMMUNITY BENEFITS COALITION$24,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY18–24, $333k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 91% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%NATIONAL COMPADRES NETWORK: $30k → 8%HISPANIC CENTER OF WESTERN MICHIGAN INC: $36k → 11%VOCES: $36k → 14%HISPANIC CENTER OF WESTERN MICHIGAN INC: $30k → 11%VOCES: $30k → 14%HISPANIC CENTER OF WESTERN MICHIGAN INC: $30k → 11%VOCES: $30k → 14%VOCES: $10k → 14%AUNTIE NAS VILLAGE: $3k → 21%URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD INITIATIVES: $98k → 21%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 88% of Detroit Hispanic Development Corporation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 90% of the giving stays in MI; by stated purpose, 10%.

Detroit Hispanic Development Corporationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

56%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 12 repeat orgs$956k to everyone else

12 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
16

Total granted

$1.2M
$780k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+75%
+96%

Still filing today

83%
44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 58% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $176k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesCommunity ImprovementArts & CultureEnvironmentCrime & LegalPublic BenefitOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • CM
    CENTRO MULTICULTURAL LA FAMILIA INC
    5× · 2019–2024 · $198k · revenue +241%
  • HT
    HISPANIC TECHNOLOGY & COMMUNITY CENTER OF GREATER FLINT
    4× · 2021–2024 · $189k · revenue +60%
  • LA
    LATIN AMERICANS UNITED FOR PROGRESS INC
    4× · 2021–2024 · $116k · revenue +951%

Funded once

  • 1 Michigan for the Global Majority
    one grant, 2020 · $205k · revenue -91% · 56% of their budget
  • IC
    ISLAMIC CENTER OF DETROIT INC
    one grant, 2020 · $144k
  • AB
    AFRICAN BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS
    one grant, 2020 · $144k
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Mexiquenses Unidos De Michigan

To support and improve the well being of latinx families in michigan, with emphasis on low income latinx families in washtenaw county.

Human Services
2
Dream of Detroit

Dream of Detroit is combining community organizing with strategic housing and land development to build a healthy community and empower a marginalized neighborhood on the Westside of Detroit.

Human Services
3
Latina Network of West Michigan

To serve as a catalyst for systemic change through leadership development, a space of cultural belonging, and reclaiming the Latina narrative, and by seeking to empower Latina leadership by serving as a resource for racial equity,…

Arts & Culture
4
About Face Detroit
—
5
Latino Political Network
—
6
Detroit Hispanic Development Corporation

The detroit hispanic development corporation's mission is to make a difference by creating life changing opportunities for youth and their families. we are committed to meeting the needs of our community by providing quality, innovative…

Community Improvement
7
Latino Leaders for the Enhancement of Advocacy and Development

Latino leaders for equity advocacy and development (llead) brings together individuals and other latinx organizations in michigan to exchange ideas and move unified solutions forward to resolve civil and human rights, health, housing,…

Human Services
8
Urban League of Detroit and Southeastern Michigan

To enable african americans and people in need to reach their full human potential

—
9
The Detroit Equity Report Inc

To promote equality and inclusion in society.

Employment
10
Mexicantown Community Development Corp

None

Community Improvement
11
Good Jobs Now Inc

To build the political and economic power of low and moderate-income detroiters of color through neighborhood-driven community organizing and civic engagement in order to change public policy and communities for the better.

—
12
Michigan Roundtable for Just Communities

Michigan roundtable for just communities is a racial and social justice organization whose purpose is eradicate racism, discrimination, and systemic inequities by cultivating multigenerational just and beloved communities.

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hispanic Center of Western Michigan Inc; the most unlike its peers is Hispanic Technology & Community Center of Greater Flint. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

20 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 20 of the 30 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/20
Grantees still filing
12/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ISLAMIC CENTER OF DETROIT INC: $144,000 · OtherISLAMIC CENTER OF DETROIT INCAFRICAN BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS (ABISA): $144,000 · OtherAFRICAN BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION AND SOCIAL AFFAIR…REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $128,452 · OtherREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGANLATIN AMERICANS UNITED FOR PROGRESS INC: $116,000 · OtherLATIN AMERICANS UNITED FOR PROGRESS INCHISPANIC AMERICAN COUNCIL INC: $96,000 · OtherHISPANIC AMERICAN COUNCIL INCTREMENDOUS INC: $72,289 · OtherTREMENDOUS INCJEWISH FAMILY SERVICES OF WASHTENAW COUNTY INC: $60,000 · OtherJEWISH FAMILY SERVICES OF WASHTENAW COUNTY INCLATIN AMERICANS FOR SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INC: $45,000 · Otherone michigan for immigrant rights: $42,500 · OtherSouthwest Detroit Community Benefits Coalition: $30,700 · Other+5 more: $29,000 · OtherVOCES: $106,000 · Human ServicesVOCESUrban Neighborhood Initiatives Inc: $98,000 · Human ServicesUrban Neighborhoo…HISPANIC CENTER OF WESTERN MICHIGAN INC: $96,000 · Human ServicesHISPANIC CENTER O…NATIONAL COMPADRES NETWORK INC: $30,000 · Human ServicesNATIONAL COMPADRE…+1 more: $2,500 · Human Services1 Michigan for the Global Majority: $205,100 · Community Improvement1 Michigan for t…GLOBAL DETROIT: $103,000 · Community ImprovementGLOBAL DETROITCENTRO MULTICULTURAL LA FAMILIA INC: $197,500 · Arts & CultureCENTRO MUL…+1 more: $2,500 · Arts & CultureHISPANIC TECHNOLOGY & COMMUNITY CENTER OF GREATER FLINT: $188,500 · Public BenefitHISPANIC …DETROITERS WORKING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE: $85,189 · HealthSOUTHWEST DETROIT COMMUNITY JUSTICE: $78,000 · Crime & Legal+1 more: $2,500 · Crime & LegalSOUTHWEST DETROIT ENVIRONMENTAL VISION: $73,312 · Environment+1 more: $2,500 · Environment
Other$907,941Human Services$332,500Community Improvement$308,100Arts & Culture$200,000Public Benefit$188,500Health$85,189Crime & Legal$80,500Environment$75,812

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budget1 Michigan for the Global Majority: $205,100 over 1y, 56% of budgetCENTRO MULTICULTURAL LA FAMILIA INC: $197,500 over 5y, 3.7% of budgetHISPANIC TECHNOLOGY & COMMUNITY CENTER OF GREATER FLINT: $188,500 over 4y, 13% of budgetLATIN AMERICANS UNITED FOR PROGRESS INC: $116,000 over 4y, 14% of budgetVOCES: $106,000 over 4y, 4.3% of budgetGLOBAL DETROIT: $103,000 over 1y, 5.1% of budgetUrban Neighborhood Initiatives Inc: $98,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetHISPANIC CENTER OF WESTERN MICHIGAN INC: $96,000 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetHISPANIC AMERICAN COUNCIL INC: $96,000 over 3y, 4.3% of budgetDETROITERS WORKING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE: $85,189 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetSOUTHWEST DETROIT COMMUNITY JUSTICE: $78,000 over 1y, 49% of budgetSOUTHWEST DETROIT ENVIRONMENTAL VISION: $73,312 over 4y, 2.2% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY SERVICES OF WASHTENAW COUNTY INC: $60,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetLATIN AMERICANS FOR SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INC: $45,000 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetNATIONAL COMPADRES NETWORK INC: $30,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetGREAT LAKES ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTE: $2,500 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetMICHIGAN ENVIROMENTAL COUNCIL: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAUNTIE NA'S VILLAGE: $2,500 over 1y, 8.5% of budgetALLIED MEDIA PROJECTS INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Community Foundation …DTE Energy FoundationWK Kellogg FoundationUnited Way for Southe…The Kresge FoundationMi PoderHispanic Federation I…The Skillman Foundati…The Fred & Barbara Er…Wayne-Metropolitan Co…Charles Stewart Mott …Michigan Nonprofit As…
Community Foundation for Southeast MichiganMI24.2× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan · DTE Energy Foundation · WK Kellogg Foundation · United Way for Southeastern Michigan · The Kresge Foundation · Mi Poder · Hispanic Federation Inc · The Skillman Foundation · The Fred & Barbara Erb Family Foundation · Wayne-Metropolitan Community Action Agency Inc · Charles Stewart Mott Foundation · Michigan Nonprofit Association

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Detroit Hispanic Development Corporation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Detroit Hispanic Development Corporation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Detroit Hispanic Development Corporation?

    Find your warmest path to Detroit Hispanic Development Corporation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 30 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Detroit Hispanic Development’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home